1951-02-14

BIRTHDAY GREETINGS


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, may I venture, as a matter of personal privilege, and on behalf of all members of the house, wherever they sit, to present a valentine of good wishes to the senior member, in years, of this house, the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor), who is today celebrating his seventy-eighth birthday. From his appearance now, and that to which we are accustomed in this house, I believe we can with confidence wish him also many happy returns. Some of us would even say that our wish is that he may yet celebrate several of those happy returns with us in this place.


Mr. George A. Drew (Leader of ihe Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, may I join the Prime Minister in extending best wishes to the member for Fort William. No matter whether we all agree entirely with everything he says, we always recognize the deep sincerity and the warm-hearted affection for his own people that prompts the things he says in this house. May I add, in wishing him many further happy years, that he is also an encouragement to some of the rest of us by the evidence he gives that life in this parliament may not be too destructive after all.


Mr. Daniel Mclvor (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, to return to the language of the farm, I am just flabbergasted. I deeply appreciate this courtesy. I do not know how long I am going to live, but I am going to live as long as I can.



CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD ACT


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. 5, to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act, 1935.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, this bill will have the effect of amending the present act in two particulars. Under the act as it stands, it is necessary to sell every last bushel of wheat or oats or barley in a pool before the pool
can be liquidated and the participation payments made to those who have delivered grain to the pool. This amendment will make it possible for the pool to sell the remnants of grain to the succeeding pool, thus making it possible to wind up pools more quickly than can be done under the act as it is today.
The bill also amends the present act in another particular. Today interim payments must be uniform for all the grain in the pool, regardless of grade. The amendment will make it possible to vary the interim payments for different grades. Owing to a problem that arises from time to time, occasionally it would be in the interest of the pool not to make the same interim payments on all grades of grain.


Mr. Fair:: May I ask the minister whether that applies to coarse grains as well?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, sir.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTION AS TO INCLUSION OF RYE AND FLAX

Mr. William Bryce (Selkirk):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. When the wheat board act is under revision, will the inclusion of rye and flax be considered?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It has not been the intention to include rye and flax in the act. The present marketing arrangement for these grains seems to be operating in a satisfactory way.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. 6, respecting the appointment of auditors for national railways.
Motion agreed to and bill -read the first time.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. T. Applewhaite (Skeena):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries,

Inquiries of the Ministry but in his absence I will address it to his parliamentary assistant. Is any action being taken by the Canadian authorities, similar to that reported from the United States, to assure that, when the Japanese peace treaty is being drawn up, adequate protection will be afforded our Pacific coast fisheries against encroachment by Japanese fishermen?


Mr. J. Walson MacNaughf (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Fisheries):: I want to assure the hon. member for Skeena that I will draw his question to the attention of my minister and that an answer will be made in due course.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. K. Fraser (Peterborough West):: should like to address a question to the Postmaster General. Why are deliveries of mail to residential districts in the cities to be cut from two deliveries to one delivery per day?


An hon. Member:: Economy.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: In other words, why are citizens to be given second-class service for first-class mail? It is not a question of economy in this case.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I should like to ask a further question. Why are postmen who are transferred from these postal routes to clerical jobs to lose their positions and their seniority, while their walks or mail routes are to be taken over on Saturdays by schoolboys at seventy-eight cents an hour?


Hon. Edouard Rinfret (Postmaster General):: I think it would be well for the hon. member to wait until the announcements are made before he makes any predictions about what is going to happen.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Mr. Speaker, a directive with regard to this matter has gone out from the Post Office Department to all post offices across Canada.


Mr. Graydon:: May I ask a supplementary question of the Postmaster General, arising out of his answer to the hon. member for Peterborough West? Have there been any changes in urban postal deliveries in recent weeks?


Édouard-Gabriel Rinfret: Some are contemplated in view of the economies that we have to make; yes.



COMBINES INVESTIGATION ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinton):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Can the minister indicate to the house when he expects to receive the report of the committee now investigating operations under the Combines Investigation Act?


Hon. Stuarl S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: I would think that the target date, about March 1, which was planned, would still remain the target date. We shall shortly know whether it is possible for us to achieve that goal in actual fact.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Will the report be brought to the attention of the house when it is received?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: Yes.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, February 13, consideration of the motion of Mr. W. H. McMillan for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Drew, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Low.
Mr. Jean Francois Pouliof (Temiscouata):: At the outset, Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the mover (Mr. McMillan) and the seconder (Mr. Breton) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. They spoke ably, and I hope that they will be heard often in this house. This is not an academic speech, and I cannot say all the good that I think of them. We disagree at times, but on the whole we manage to get along fairly well together. The proof of that statement may be found in the farewell speech of the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith). He is one of the most brilliant members of parliament that I have met. I am sure that both Mr. and Mrs. Smith will be so greatly missed, that their farewell will be merely "au revoir" and that we shall see them again, Mr. Smith in the House of Commons and Mrs. Smith in Ottawa.
The subamendment proposed last night reads as follows:
To ensure that a complete program of preparedness including compulsory training in the reserve forces for home defence be executed with the greatest possible degree of equality of sacrifice and service.

I am strongly opposed to the kind of onesided conscription for military service only which was in force during the last war. It was back-door conscription from November 1940 to November 1944, but open-door conscription thereafter did not win the war and served nobody other than racketeers and greedy profiteers. During both wars it was only a political football. I am sick and tired of hearing the repetition of the speeches made by the Marses and Thors of both wars. I may tell the Legion right now that if they were looking after their own disabled members they would serve their members much better than by telling members of parliament what to do. I have always considered the manpower of my country to be its most valuable asset, and I will do my utmost to defend and to protect my fellow citizens in case of emergency. I appreciate the fact that the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) has spoken sensibly and honestly about this vital issue. That is why he enjoys the confidence and respect of all. He deserves it. I regret nothing that I have said or done in the past to combat bureaucratic anarchy and I hope not to have the same trouble as I had in the past in exposing political insanity to internal ridicule against a background of rampant prejudice.
I love my country. I am satisfied to be a member of the Liberal party and I do not want this fine association of men and women of good will to fall into the errors of the last war. I have a right to speak and I am going to do so. I have taken some notes in my own hand in order to make my speech shorter, because the time allowed to me today is not long. I am familiar enough with the contemporary history of Canada to tell the true story of conscription. I have been forty-three years in political life. When I was eighteen I made my first political speech at the Laurier meeting at Murray Bay in 1908. Many of my hon. colleagues were not yet born. I was elected for the first time at a by-election on December 1, 1924, as a straight Liberal against the convention nominee who was defeated by 3,500 votes. A week later Mr. Mackenzie King invited me to luncheon at Laurier House with Mr. Lapointe and both introduced me to Mr. Speaker. With the exception of the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Power) and the hon. member for Danforth (Mr. Harris) I am the senior member of this house; and with due deference I may consider you, sir, and all my other hon. colleagues as newcomers, but I do not. I have been honest with my electors and I thank them for my political survival throughout these many years.
The Address-Mr. Pouliot
At the outset of world war II two proclamations were issued. The first was a declaration of emergency signed by the then attorney general of Canada. The second came a few days later. It was a declaration of war signed by Mr. William Lyon Mackenzie King who explained to us in caucus that he wanted to sign it with his full name because his grandfather, who had been banished as a rebel during the last century, would have stood by His Majesty the King in 1939. From August 1939 to the capitulation of France the war was called a phony one. The War Measures Act of 1914 had not yet been repealed. It was still in force. But in June 1940 the National Resources Mobilization Act, 1940, was hastily passed and the Department of National War Services was established. In the meantime, there was the general election of 1940, which was easily won by the Liberal party. I wrote to Mr. Lapointe. I said:
During the last election I said in each parish that under your government anyone would be free to enlist if he chose, but that no one would be forced to do so, whereas with Mr. Manion in power we would inevitably have compulsory military service.
This letter may be found in Hansard of June 18, 1940, at page 871. Nevertheless, due to the affolement caused by the fall of France, both human and material resources were mobilized for the defence of Canada. My party had been so bitter against Tory conscription that another word had to be used for the same meaning and the same purpose, and later on followed to the letter the precedents established by the Union government. There was a registration of all men of military age, and because the hon. member for Papineau (Mr. Houde), who was then mayor of Montreal, objected to it, he was sent to a concentration camp.
Believe it or not, Mr. Speaker, to prevent the imposition of conscription I offered to raise in my constituency a regiment in two weeks for the defence of Canada. I added that if each member did likewise we would have in a very short time an army of 245,000 for the defence of Canada. Mr. King rejected it. He repeated in the house what I had said in the caucus room. Here is what he said, according to Hansard of June 19, 1940, at page 922:
An hon. member on this side of the house made the statement publicly this morning that he felt he could go into his constituency and, by making it known to his constituents that this measure had to do with the protection of Canada and our own Canadian soil, bring forward in a very short time men from the forests, from the fields and from the factories, all prepared immediately to join the Canadian forces to resist any possible invasion, and that he would be prepared to guarantee that that could be done in constituency after constituency throughout the country, once it was understood that
350	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Pouliot
there was the necessity of defending our own Canadian shores. I pointed out to him that in doing that he might be making the greatest mistake possible with respect to the national interest; that, to win this war, we might wish to keep at work in the forests the men who are now working in the forests, to provide the timber which will be required for docks and wharves and required immediately; that the men who are working in the factories may be a thousand times more useful to the government of this country in giving their skilled labour to the manufacture of aircraft, munitions, or other weapons of war than they could possibly be in lining up and presenting themselves for military service; equally that on the farms, if we are to perform what will be expected of us, we shall need all the production that can be effectively and rapidly carried out on the farms of our country.
The day after, I asked him the following question-I quote from Hansard at page 969:
I want to make myself as clear as possible. I am speaking only of mobilization for home defence, and I want to know if a man not in the class that may be called for military service in connection with home defence may enlist just the same, without being obliged to agree to overseas service.


Mr. Mackenzie King:: The answer is yes.
It should have been no. My position was made clear in a letter that I wrote to Mr. Lapointe and which is on Hansard of June 18, 1940. I quote from page 872:
If we say to the French Canadians that henceforth recruiting will be solely for the defence of Canada, in Canada, and if we remove all obstacles to voluntary enlistment, you will be surprised to see the number of French Canadians ready to enlist, provided that they are well equipped and well trained and that they be given competent commanding officers.
I have summarized the conversations I have had with a large number of good Canadians. Since then, I have had occasion to converse with Englishspeaking members who told me quite openly that war was too serious a matter to be considered from the point of view of sentiment, and that our policy should be guided by reason. They added that in their counties there is an awakening of Canadian sentiment for the organization on a solid basis of the defence of Canada against any aggressor. By a strange revulsion of feeling, it is on the solid basis of Canadianism that national unity will be established.
Yours very truly,
Jean Francois Pouliot


Mr. Gauthier:: Very well.
The parliamentary leader of the opposition was Mr. R. B. Hanson, a former colleague of Bennett. He was a jingo and a megaphone of Arthur Meighen. He was insisting upon outright conscription, and the prime minister of the time did all he could to appease him.
The registration being completed, it was considered necessary to make the best use of it, and the iniquitous national war services regulations, 1940, were passed. They had been prepared in the heat of the summer, and in the absence of Mr. Lapointe, by a western judge and an industrious Quebec lawyer, who had to report to another Quebec cabinet
[Mr. Pouliot.l

minister who was holding five portfolios, exactly like Mussolini. These regulations were approved by P.C. 4185 on August 27, 1940. Here is the part of the regulations that I particularly objected to:
Seasonal employees.
Listen to this, Mr. Speaker:
14. (1) Each divisional registrar shall deliver to the board in his administrative division copies of all registration cards in his possession upon which it is stated that the men registered are engaged in farming, fishing, lumbering, trapping or other seasonal occupation.
Agriculture and lumbering and even transportation were considered as seasonal occupations.
(2) In the case of men engaged in farming, fishing, lumbering, trapping or other seasonal occupation, the board may make advancement orders or postponement orders as seems best in the public interest.
Under these regulations, special exemptions were provided for conscientious objectors, Mennonites and Doukhobors. One had to use a religious motive to be exempted, and no consideration was given to the essential and vital importance of farming and other essential war industries. I wrote in my local weekly some advice for the draftees, and I asked my secretary to ask the deputy minister of national war services what he thought of it. She saw her factotum. He was a major in the general's office, and he told her that my advice was all right except that there was no conscription. I should have used the right word "mobilization"-just sheer hypocrisy. In September of 1940 a five-man council composed of the deputy minister of agriculture and of representatives of the deputy minister of fisheries, mines and resources and transport, and also the wealthiest lumberman of British Columbia was appointed to explain the seasonal description, of the essential war industries. Their report was sent by the then deputy minister of! labour to the deputy minister of national war services on September 4, 1940, a week after the regulations were passed.
That manpower council made an effort of imagination to report that each of the essential war industries was primary only during the peak of employment, and was of secondary importance during the rest of the year.
I shall jnention two, namely agriculture and lumbering. I shall send to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg) the French copy of the instructions that were sent to the registrars of the various boards. He may check the' resume I have made of that piece of nonsense. Those fine brains, those bureaucrats for the time, established a distinction between the primary and secondary periods of essential industry.

The Address-Mr. Pouliot
For instance, in the three maritime provinces agriculture was considered a primary industry. It was so declared in Prince Edward Island from May to November, a period of seven months; in Nova Scotia there was mixed farming during July and August, a period of two months. In New Brunswick it ran from May 1 to June 15, or a month and a half, and from July 1 to October 15, three and a half months, making a total of five months in all, with a lull of two weeks.
Butter and cheese production was considered n secondary industry. In Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia it ran from June to September, a period of four months, an in New Brunswick from June to August, a period of three months.
The canning of fruits and vegetables took place in Prince Edward Island in December and January, a period of two months-and I have never heard of fruit and vegetables being canned in those winter months. In Nova Scotia it ran from September to December, a period of four months. In New Brunswick there was no canning of fruits and vegetables, but they were making biscuits, and there was catering and cocoa. For a period of two months, namely September and October, there was salting, as there was also for a further two months in October and November.
Turning to the miscellaneous items, we find fecula and glucose for the two months of October and November. In Nova Scotia, pop and mineral water for the two months of July and August. I do not know if any farmer makes pop. Then, in New Brunswick we find chemical products and fertilizers for the one month of May. It seems that they make fertilizers in one month. I thought they were getting it all the year round.
Turning to Ontario and Quebec, we find that agriculture was considered a primary industry. In Ontario it was so considered, as a rule, for the two months of July and August, but "this year"-that is, 1940, it ran from July 1 to September 15, or a period of two and a half months, during which time agriculture was considered essential and a primary industry. However, there were exceptions. In district A-and no one knows what that is-the period ran for four and a half months, from June 15 to October 31.
Then, in the south portion of Quebec-


Mr. Harris (Danforth):: On a point of order, surely the hon. member is not reading his speech, is he?


Jean-François Pouliot: I will tell the hon. member, one of the two members who are senior to me, that I do it so as to be just as brief as possible. If I had not written these things,
and made reference to them in this way, I would be speaking for days and days about conscription-and would surprise him very much.- I want to be accurate. I have sent a copy of the report to the minister so that he may check to see just how absurd it was. Naturally I do my best to satisfy the legitimate curiosity of the house.
The report shows that agriculture was considered a primary industry in the south portion of Quebec for a period of four months, from May to August; in the northern part, where it is colder, it ran from June to September-one month later in each case.
Turning to a secondary industry, butter and cheese production was so considered in Ontario for the four months from June to September, and in Quebec for the six months from May to October. Other dairy products in Ontario and Quebec were recorded for the three months from June to August. The information concerning condensed milk gives, for Ontario, the three months from June to August. The canning of fruits and vegetables is given as the four months from July to October in Ontario and the three months from July to September in Quebec. For tobacco curing and packing, it runs for the three months from December to February in Ontario, and the three months from January to March in Quebec; for pop and mineral water, the two months of July and August in Ontario, and the three months from June to August in Quebec.
Whoever heard of that?
Then, miscellaneous, leather articles and mitts, Quebec only, the four months from July to October; sugar refining, Ontario only, October and November; and wine, Ontario only, for the month of October.
I now come to the prairie provinces-and this will interest the mover and seconder of the subamendment respecting conscription.
Agriculture is given as a primary industry in Manitoba, the northern part, from August 15 to September 12, or a period of less than one month. In the southern portion it is given as only the month of August. In the southern part of Saskatchewan it runs for the one month of August, and in the northern portion of that province, the one month of September. The farther one goes to the north, the later, naturally, is the season.
The season in Alberta-here it is-is given as the two months of April and May, following which there is a lull for the two months of June and July, followed by the inclusion of the two months of September and October, making a total of four months in all. There is nothing to do between May and September. I wonder what my hon. friends think of that?

The Address-Mr. Pouliot
This was drawn up and sent to the registrar so that he could draft the people accordingly, and was done for the purpose of putting in the minds of those people that agriculture was not a necessity and was not an essential industry. How could they defend that?


Mr. Low:: It is obviously ridiculous, is it not?


Jean-François Pouliot: But we are about to do the same thing-and that is what I do not want. I want them to listen to me, and they will learn a lot.


Mr. Wylie:: You might think so, but we don't.


Solon Earl Low: Which government was in power in Quebec?


Jean-François Pouliot: It was the Liberal party and a Liberal government. But all my friends from the west were strong for conscription right at the very start, when we were fighting the cause of labour and the farmers. I am not attacking anyone; I am just telling the truth. Who of that party ever supported me when I was fighting the cause of the farmers? No one did.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: People from the west remember; don't be silly about it.


Jean-François Pouliot: It may hurt my hon. friend.


William Duncan McKay Wylie: It doesn't hurt.


Jean-François Pouliot: If it doesn't hurt, shut up.
Then, as a secondary industry, butter and cheese, for the province of Manitoba-


William Duncan McKay Wylie: It does hurt you.


Mr. Coldwell:: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: It is obvious there have been too many interruptions.


Jean-François Pouliot: The report shows that, in connection with secondary industry, concerning dairy products other than butter and cheese, only the months of June to August are set out for Alberta. For butter and cheese, the report shows for Manitoba, May to September; Saskatchewan, June to September; and Alberta, May to October. For the canning of fruits and vegetables-and this is a secondary industry, of course-it shows: Manitoba, July and August; Alberta, July and August and no record for Saskatchewan. For pop and mineral waters, it is from June to August in Manitoba, the month of July in Saskatchewan and from June to August in Alberta.
Turning to primary industry in British Columbia we find a record for April and May, with a lull of two months, followed by September and October.
Let us consider the forest industry. I am sorry I cannot mention what is said about

secondary industry, but saw mills, the manufacture of wooden boxes and cooperage were considered to be secondary. In New Brunswick the forest industry was a primary industry from November to May, seven months.


Mr. Hatfield:: All the year round.


Jean-François Pouliot: I know that. I am getting my information from the remarks of hon. members.


Mr. Speaker:: I must remind hon. members that their remarks must be directed to Mr. Speaker. Hon. members should not converse across the floor of the chamber.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Speaker, when I get
approval from any one of my colleagues I cannot do otherwise than beam with joy.


Mr. Knowles:: Beam at the Speaker.


Jean-François Pouliot: Ontario and Quebec, forest
industry: Ontario, December to March, four months; Quebec, November to March, five months. Saw mills: Ontario, May to September and Quebec, May to July; Ontario five months, and Quebec three months. Pulpwood and paper: Quebec, July to October, four months. Imagine what would happen if the pulpwood mills were working for only four months. Wooden boxes: Quebec, May to September, five months. Roofing paper and board: Quebec, May to October, six months. Shipbuilding: Ontario, May to July, three months. Iceboxes: Ontario, April to June.
Here are details of the forest industry in the prairie provinces. Primary industry: Manitoba, December to April; Saskatchewan, the same thing; Alberta, the same thing. Secondary industry-saw mills: Manitoba, June and July. No saw mills in Saskatchewan and Alberta apparently. Primary industry in British Columbia-


An hon. Member:: You are wrong there.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am simply stating what has been decided upon by these bureaucrats. A lot of my hon. friends support me and agree with me when I say it is wrong. Primary industry in British Columbia, April to June and September to December. There is a lull in July and August. Secondary industry- shipbuilding: March to July. That is all.
The report of that irresponsible and silly brain trust was mimeographed and forwarded by the deputy minister of war services to the registrars and members of the mobilization boards, as a directive to be used by them, to be used as their vade mecum. As a cure for unemployment everyone of military age was called for military training. No industry was recognized as being essential for the prosecution of the war. It was considered to be the duty of all young men to be in

the army. All those who did not sign lor overseas service were disdainfully branded as zombies. A great many were taken away from the farms. A farmer who did not enlist was not considered to be a good citizen. The first chairman of the Quebec board was such a fanatic and lunatic that I succeeded in having him replaced. His practice was to decide that farm hands who were working part-time in the forest were not real farmers and were not engaged in an essential industry.
The thirty days training period was decided by P.C. 4904 of September 17, 1940. It was extended to four months, or for such other period as the Minister of National Defence may from time to time prescribe, by order in council of March 18, 1941. The training was extended for the duration of the war by a stroke of the pen of the Minister of National Defence. Army Order No. 132 of July 2, 1941, was printed but was not published in the Canada Gazette. It was not made public until I asked for it four and a half months later in this house in the middle of November, and I refer hon. members to page 4359 of Hansard of November 13, 1941. Each one of the joint defence ministers had the same responsibility for it. I used the name of Mr. Lapointe and did my best to unfasten all the wrong that had been screwed in by the three defence ministers and their wooden-headed brass hats. I pointed out to them that the industries that I have mentioned were essential but they were too hard-hearted to strike out the word "seasonal." I succeeded in getting an amendment through on June 6, 1941, nearly a year after it was decided that they were seasonal and essential. That was a victory.
Now we come to the plebiscite, which read:
Are you In favour of releasing the government from any obligation arising out of any commitments restricting the methods of raising men for military service?
The affirmative vote was 64.2 per cent, but the vote in, Quebec was 72.5 against. Senator Dandurand told me that the question was drafted to be as obscure as possible so that nobody would understand what he was voting for. They wanted to save the face of the Liberal party with the people of Canada. I pay a tribute to my colleagues in the Liberal party who decided to vote against the government on the issue of conscription. Some hon. gentlemen joined the Bloc Populaire, others went with the Independent group, but two hon. members and myself went to the last row of seats in the chamber to indicate that we were still remaining Liberal and were keeping alive the traditions of the party. We had nothing to do with the other groups. It was pretty hard to do that. I notified Mr. The Address-Mr. Pouliot King before I did it and he seemed surprised. However, it was my duty to do it.
If members of the Liberal party have been re-elected they must thank the members who were against conscription during the last war. If we had not taken that stand the Liberal party would have been finished and the Tories would have come in after changing their policy to catch the vote of the people.


An hon. Member:: Too bad they were not.


Jean-François Pouliot: I was here for twenty-six years before the hon. member was born and I shall be here long after he has been defeated by the people at the polls. Then there was the registration of women. We had to follow everything that England was doing. In England1 they had a registration of women and in this country all the women had to be WAACS. The registration of women in the age group 20 to 24 years inclusive took place from September 14 to September 19, 1942, for the purpose of establishing an inventory of manpower. If hon. members would like to have more details I refer them to page 361 of Hansard of March 28, 1946.
At the time I wanted to defeat Lafleche who was running in Montreal. Everything was organized and some day I will tell the story to the house.


George Alexander Drew: Tell us today.


Jean-François Pouliot: I have not the time. You would not let me proceed. You would] be calling "Forty minutes! time!" However, I promise the hon. member that I will tell him the story some day. Mr. Cardin was ready to support us if there was unanimity, but there was no unanimity because one of the members wanted to be a parliamentary assistant. Another hon. member, who now holds a high office outside of this house, told me he had ambitions similar to those of Stalin. He said, "Don't you think I would be a good secretary of a soviet?" We were not a soviet and we did not need a secretary so he was not appointed. I went to support one of the Independent candidates in Charlevoix-Saguenay.


An hon. Member:: That was wrong.


Jean-François Pouliot: What is the matter? I went there to prevent the conscription of women. There was no government nominee. There were four or five independents. I went there and explained the matter to the people. The previous ministerial majority of 9,000 was changed to a majority of 3,400 for the man whom I was supporting. The day after the election a friend of mine, an old pillar of the Liberal party, was in Murray Bay. He said: I voted for the Independent candidate supported by Pouliot. It was a good thing

The Address-Mr. Pouliot that he came. No other member of parliament came to the county during that election. We were waiting for word about what to do. Thanks to Pouliot we had that word, we elected our man so that there would be no conscription of women, and there was none.
I could say many other things, but you may ask me what is my conclusion. My conclusion is that I was amazed when I heard about the appointment of a manpower council consisting of labour leaders, beautiful women, businessmen, members of the civil service and Rhys Sale. If members have time to look at Votes and Proceedings for yesterday *they will see that I have given notice of two questions I intend to ask about these people. The first question is:
Referring to the members of the newly established national advisory council on manpower,
1.	What is the civilian background and the overseas military record and experience of each one?
2.	What was the occupation of each one during world war XI?
3.	What was their occupation and their residence at the time of their appointment to the said council?
4.	Is that membership a full-time job?
5.	Where and when do the meetings of the said council take place?
6.	What remuneration is paid to the members of the said council?
Here is the second question.
1.	Are any of the members of the national advisory council on manpower connected with any firm or company which was awarded government contracts directly or through subsidiary companies?
2.	If so, who are they?
Having said that, I come to what Rhys Sale has said before certain social service clubs in an effort to strike the government below the belt. In Time magazine for January 29 he said in part:
We have the wherewithal for a defence effort ten times greater than the puny program now in effect.
How many contracts does the Ford Motor Company and its subsidiaries have? I find it shameful that some men of importance in the business world should try to defend conscription, the killing of people, not the defence of the country, for the benefit of their companies. If we have to have conscription we must have the conscription of everything. We must have conscription of wealth. The wealthy should pay for the armament program to the greatest extent that it is possible to get money from them. I abhor these people who think of war only in terms of the prospects of making money.
My conclusion is twofold. I sincerely suggest to the government the immediate abolition of the manpower council none of whose members are responsible to the people. Second, I recommend the appointment of a
fMr. Pouliot.]
parliamentary committee-it is more important than Canada day-of responsible members of the House of Commons to study the Canadian manpower problem in its entirety with due consideration of the usefulness of all Canadian citizens in each of the essential war industries. The senators are too old to serve on such a committee. I have also come to one conclusion with respect to the labour leaders who are members of the advisory council on manpower. They may be nice fellows. I know one or two of them, but let me tell you what happened during the last war when I addressed a question to the then minister of labour who was in charge of mobilization after the national war services department was abolished. Some members who were here then must remember that I asked him what the duty was of each Canadian citizen and that he answered that the duty of each Canadian citizen was to come to the colours and enlist in the army. I said: No sir, you are mistaken. What would the soldier do without the assistance of the farmer, the railwayman, the miner, those who make arms and munitions, those who are engaged in the leather industry, the transport industry, and all other industries? It is a most difficult problem.
Then he tabled letters from Mr. Coleman and Mr. Vaughan, respectively presidents of the C.P.R. and the C.N.R., that were exactly to the same effect as the speeches I had made and the articles I had written. Some time later one high leader of labour organizations came to Riviere du Loup to distribute medals to veteran employees. I said to him: "Sir, you did not thank me for what I have done. I did not expect your thanks but you could have told me that you appreciated the fact that in parliament I have done your job, the job that you have always been reluctant to do." He said to me: "You know, I had an uncle who was a judge of the supreme court of the United States, and I left my family to join the labour ranks." I said: "That is all right but the reason that you do not approve of the fact that I have defended your own men, those who pay to be members of your union, is not because I do not wear overalls; it is because I am not a member of your own union, and you should be ashamed of yourself." The conversation ended there.
Is there anyone in Canada who knows the needs of the Canadian people better than members of parliament? I disagree with other members at times. I tell them what I think and they tell me what they think. Then we meet, shake hands and everything is ironed out. Is there anyone in Canada who has the

knowledge and wisdom of all members of parliament as a body so far as the discussion of such a vital issue as manpower is concerned? I bring the matter to the attention of the government. I have been very careful in my remarks. I have named very few people but I will name many if the thing continues in the future as it has been going on in the past. It is time to stop making a political football of conscription. We are all ready to defend Canada. We are all ready to support the army but that does not mean that we have to listen to the predictions of the Legion.


Mr. G. R. Pearkes (Nanaimo):: Mr. Speaker, in common with the previous speaker I wish to discuss this question of manpower. I cannot promise the house as interesting or as amusing a forty minutes as those to which they have just been treated, because I have not the parliamentary experience nor the natural wit of the member who has just resumed his seat. It will be recalled that on February 1 the leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew) moved an amendment to the address in reply to the speech from the throne which, in part, contains these words:
We regret that Your Excellency's advisers have failed
(1)	to give this nation leadership in the face of the present grave danger; and
(2)	to bring into being forces necessary to enable Canada to defend itself and discharge its international obligations;
The remaining words of the amendment do not refer directly to this question of manpower. I should like to remind hon. members that that amendment was introduced after the leader of the opposition had asked the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) if he would adjourn this debate in order that the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton), and the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson), might make statements. That request was denied. This amendment, therefore, was introduced before the government program had been clearly defined in detail, as it was subsequently, by the Minister of National Defence. I do not know that there would have been any change in the wording of that amendment, even though we had heard the speech delivered by the Minister of National Defence.
I feel, and I think evidence has been produced during this debate to indicate, that there has been a lack of leadership on the part of the government in being able to sell to the people of Canada the gravity of the situation today. Members from various parts of the country have pointed out that the units of the reserve army are in a deplorable condition, in so far as the number of recruits for those units is concerned. There have been 80709-232
The Address-Mr. Pearkes press accounts from one side of Canada to the other showing quite clearly that practically all units of the reserve army are under strength. The reserve army is recruited voluntarily, mainly from amongst the young men of this country. I have faith in young Canada, and I have been associated with young Canada for a good many years. I cannot help believing that had this issue been put up fairly and clearly to young Canada, there would have been a better response to the appeals which have been made for recruits for the reserve army, the reserve division of the navy, and the auxiliary air force.
Turning to the second part of the amendment, namely our regret that the government had failed to bring into being forces which were ready to meet an emergency, one cannot help but recall the feverish activity which was necessary last fall in order to raise the' special force which was then to go to Korea or elsewhere. When the Minister of National Defence spoke, he outlined a program which is designed to bring into being large forces in all services. That very speech, that very program, surely is evidence to show that there is justification for our regret that the government has failed in the past to bring in forces which would be adequate to meet the situation. I frankly admit that the situation has deteriorated rapidly, but there is somewhat of the appearance of a deathbed repentance on the part of the government now when, at the eleventh hour, it seeks to raise far more substantial forces to be ready and in being to meet the obligations that Canada has accepted, and to be prepared for the defence of our own country.
You will recall the program which has been outlined:	100 vessels or thereabouts
for the Royal Canadian Navy; 40 squadrons for the Royal Canadian Air Force; and somewhere about a division for the army. According to the figures given by the minister the active component of these three services would total approximately 115,000 men. It must be recalled that for a number of years the members on this side of the house have been urging the government to take a more realistic view of the situation, and not to adhere too slavishly to worn-out methods of raising forces, to realize that in modern warfare there may not be the time to equip, train and recruit forces after the outbreak of war, while some other country has its regular force holding back the enemy.
I recall how, during the special session of last fall, the leader of this party stressed the necessity of having forces in being. Every hon. member in this house was impressed by the statements which were made last week by the member for Quebec South (Mr. Power),

The Address-Mr. Pearkes who spoke from the depth of his vast experience as the minister of national defence for air during the last war. He stressed the importance of the air arm, not only for the defence of Canada but for Canada's obligations wherever they might be. I cannot help reminding the house that it was not very long ago that I said very much the same thing. I said that the air arm was the essential arm for the defence of Canada. With its speed and range it is the only service that can eliminate distance, and Canada is a country of vast distances. I even went so far as to suggest that for every dollar spent on one of the other services, three dollars should be spent on the air services. I was laughed at. Before the end of these three years I think you will admit that we are coming much closer to that mark than I ever thought this government would. It is not surprising to see that the R.C.A.F. is to be increased by two and a half times its present strength. The government has laid down this program. I believe that the remarks contained in the amendment are justified and that one's criticism of the program would be in the main: You are starting too late. In other respects that program places emphasis on the air arm; it emphasizes the importance of having forces in being. The government has made clear how it intends to raise the men to man those formations and to man the equipment. I think the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) was quite clear when, speaking in the house on February 1 as reported at page 28 of Hansard, he said:
So far there has been brought to my attention nothing that would indicate that the institution of national selective service at this time would be beneficial. On the contrary, the information we have obtained is that it would hamper what is being done at this moment. Now, that does not mean that the situation cannot change, and it does not mean that if and when it does change there will not be changes in the manner in which our resources will be contributed to this pool of international strength.
That surely means that at the present time the government has decided to raise those forces by voluntary enlistment but that if the international situation deteriorates, or if this attempt to raise the forces by voluntary enlistment fails, then the government will be prepared to consider other means. Nothing that I can say in this house or out in the country, nothing that any member who is a supporter of the government can say, nor anything that any other member of this house can say, can change that point of view of the government. I for one believe that these men are needed. If I made statements in this house and if I went about the country and made statements, now that the government has announced how it intends to raise the men this country needs, I believe I could discourage young men from volunteering to


go into the active forces and that I could do something towards sabotaging this country's efforts. But I have never been a saboteur or a traitor and I will do nothing of the sort.
That being the case, I think it is up to all hon. members of this house to try to further this country's effort to raise men by the only means that is possible for this country at the present time, because of the government's decision, namely by voluntary enlistment. In my humble capacity I shall do what I can in that respect to help the services obtain the men that I am convinced they now need. I believe that the situation is grave and I believe it is imperative that at the earliest possible opportunity we have in the forces adequate men to meet, within the next few months, a situation that might arise.
A subamendment has been moved to the amendment that was introduced by the leader of this party. That subamendment would add these words:
That the amendment be amended by adding thereto the following as clause 4:
4. To ensure that a complete program of preparedness including compulsory training in the reserve forces for home defence be executed with the greatest possible degree of equality of sacrifice and service.
I want to stress once more the point that conscription for the active army is net a matter which is under consideration at this time. This is suggesting a form of compulsory training in the reserve forces. I must review the value of that suggestion in the light of the program which has now been announced by the government. This subamendment was introduced after the government's program had been made known. I must therefore ask myself this question: Will having universal compulsory military training for the reserve army, navy and air force help or hinder the government's program to raise 115,000 men for the forces in being? I cannot help but come to the conclusion that if the emphasis is to be placed on getting recruits by compulsory means into the reserve forces, then there will have to be a reduction in the effort which is being made to raise and maintain the forces in being. One does not need to go into great detail. It is obvious that if you bring into the reserve forces hundreds of thousands of young men-it would not be hundreds or thousands; it would be hundreds of thousands if you were going to introduce compulsory universal service in the reserve army-you could not begin to train those men without drawing heavily upon the forces which are now the active components of the various services. This would mean retarding the preparations of those active components to get ready for a task that they

may have to do in a short time. One would have to pull out instructors from the special Korean brigade and from the special airborne brigade, to deal only with the army. You would have to take instructors from the R.C.A.F., and at the present time the active components of the R.C.A.F. have not sufficient men to carry out the numerous duties that they have to do. It would be detrimental in any way to interfere with their program of preparation where they have to expand themselves two and a half times the size they are now in order that they may be ready within the next three years to man the great part of the forty squadrons of the R.C.A.F.
Then comes the question of equipment. I do not believe that the program of replacement of uniforms and boots, for instance, and clothing generally, that has been carried out over the past three or four years has enabled the government to make any sizeable stockpiles of that equipment. I have no doubt that the various services have a reasonable reserve of that equipment, reasonable enough to meet the expansion that they foresee now, but I very much doubt-I have no information on the matter-whether there are reserves which would be able to take care of hundreds of thousands of young Canadians who are called in to the reserve army.
Then, as was pointed out by the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis), the question of accommodation in itself would make it almost impossible at the present time to train adequately large numbers in the reserve forces. It would therefore be necessary to divert from other defence projects essential building materials in order to provide the accommodation, the drill halls, and so forth for these men who will be called up. Therefore I am forced to the conclusion that, if we adopt this subamendment, instead of helping the country to procure the men that I believe are so essential to have in the active components it would retard the effort that is now being made.
It has been mentioned during the course of the debate that the suggestion was based upon the recommendations of the Canadian Legion. I am a member of the Canadian Legion, and have been from the day that it was formed. I have spoken to branches of the Canadian Legion in my constituency. I have congratulated them upon focusing public attention upon the urgent needs for improving our defence forces. I think it is a splendid effort that the Legion has made by sending from one coast to another notices of its "Operation preparedness" and of holding meetings of its members, communicating with members of parliament, and in some instances of holding public meetings in order
The Address-Mr. Peark.es to focus attention upon the needs of this country to increase the state of defence.
Remember also that this Legion brief, this "Operation preparedness", was drawn up and issued and the majority of these meetings were held before the government had announced its program for defence. I do not know what the Legion would say now; I have had no communication with them; but I think the Legion would expect that the government is going to implement many of its recommendations.
The first of these recommendations is that there should be what the Legion describes as national registration. It says:
Nothing can be done to organize efficiently the resources and manpower of this country until a complete national registration has been carried out and proper assessment made of the information gained.
In view of the time necessary to conduct such a large-scale project and to interpret the results, it is vitally necessary that this be started immediately.
Everybody will agree with that. I know I can subscribe to that, and I have said that I subscribe to it in every detail. I believe it is necessary that the government carry out a review of its manpower resources. I should like to see that review of a very thorough nature. I do not think that there is any time to be lost. In my opinion that review should canvass the whole country to decide where national registration boards can be set up and who are the people to be on them; to draw up some uniform questionnaire which these boards would ask of young men. I should like to see it go even further than that. Some form of preliminary medical examination should be held so that if it became necessary for the government to change its form of finding its personnel for its force it would have all that material. As far as medical examinations are concerned, although a second one would have to be carried out, it could be done far more expeditiously than if no preliminary survey had been made.
I cannot help thinking that the Canadian Legion, the country as a whole, and this parliament, will expect this manpower committee, which the government has set up, at least to explore and see how far it could go in making that review of the manpower of our country. The very fact that the deputy minister of national defence has been named as a member of that committee indicates at least that the government does intend to show how the armed forces requirements will fit into that over-all picture. I feel very keenly that this parliament will hold the government responsible for seeing that that committee does a thorough job.

The Address-Mr. Pearkes
The next recommendation of the Canadian Legion deals with the mobilization of industrial resources for defence production. Here again it says:
If this situation is allowed to continue, it can have only one ultimate result-our hastily mobilized forces will not only be poorly trained but will be tragically lacking in equipment when faced with an enemy thoroughly prepared for war, and Canadian lives will be needlessly sacrificed on the altar of procrastination.
We have heard already during this session of parliament of the setting up of a new department of defence production. The people of this country will hold the government responsible for seeing that that department does a thorough job. And if it does a thorough job, then this second requisite of the Canadian Legion will be complied with.
The third is that of compulsory training in the reserve forces. I do not go with the Legion as far as that, and I do not believe the Legion branches would have subscribed wholeheartedly to that program if they had been asked to submit this after hearing the government's program for raising the forces that are considered necessary to be in being.
As I have already said, if we adopted this compulsory service in the reserve forces- and as the Legion frankly admits-there would be many difficulties in the way. It may be argued-and I do not think any member on this side of the house would have the right to argue it-that it would be necessary for the government to provide the extra money to carry out this program, that it would go ahead with its present program utilizing the $5 billion in the next three years, and that it would go to the country and ask for, shall we say, an extra $2 billion -I do not think that figure would be excessive-in order to enable the putting into effect of the Legion's recommendations. But if such a suggestion were made the amendment would have been ruled out of order.
I have said that I do not think it is advisable to have compulsory universal training in the reserve army within the amount of money to be provided by the government. I repeat, I feel that it would deter and distract attention from what I believe is the main effort that Canadians should be making in this situation, namely to create forces in being ready at a short time to meet a rapidly deteriorating world situation.
But even if the government did feel that it was prepared to advance large additional sums of money, by making available such large sums to take care of this compulsory training in the reserve forces, I doubt very much whether that would be the right way to expend the additional funds.

I believe quite possibly more money might or should be made available; but I question very much whether the soundest way would be to expend it on compulsory training in the reserve forces. I fear that if we brought into the reserve forces hundreds of thousands of young men who would be given, shall we say, thirty, forty or even fifty days training a year, this country would be lulled into a false sense of security, believing that they had hundreds of thousands of young men thoroughly trained and ready to take the field at a moment's notice.
No other country I know of attaches such importance to having compulsory training in its second line or reserve forces. There is no compulsory training in the national guard of the United States, which may be considered as comparable with our reserve army. One may say that in the territorial army there is; but then in the territorial army of Great Britain only men who have served in active components of the regular force are required to continue their service in the reserve-and that is an entirely different outlook from that of placing raw recruits into reserve formations and then trying to kid the people that you have a really efficient defence force.
I would like to pay a very humble tribute to the officers and men of the reserve forces.
I have been connected with them for I suppose thirty years in one capacity or another, and I know of the immense effort and the immense patriotic sacrifice made voluntarily by those men to prepare themselves for war. The strength of the reserve force is that it is a voluntary force, and that they are prepared to give so much more than what is actually demanded of them.
Now then, if you begin to force men to go into this reserve force you will kill that spirit -because the men who are forced into these units will do only what is actually required of them by law. And how you are going to enforce that law, I have not the slightest idea.
Therefore I feel, looking at the situation across the country as I know it, that it would be really impracticable to have this compulsory training in the reserve army. And even if the money were available I would not recommend that it be spent in that way.
Finally I may have to sound something of an almost personal note. I see that in this subamendment there is the recommendation for conscription or compulsory universal training in the reserve army for home defence. As one who a few years ago suffered the agonies of trying to persuade soldiers who had been called up for home defence to volunteer to go and fight alongside

those men who were fighting farther afield for Canadian homes, I never want to saddle anybody else with that same problem.
So, Mr. Speaker, while I heartily support every effort that should be made toward total preparedness, I cannot support this subamendment, because I feel that it will distract attention from the main object we have before us at the present time, the utmost importance of producing men at the earliest possible time.
I have spoken in the house about the need for the defence of Canada. I think that to a certain extent Canada is vulnerable today. I think the extent to which it is vulnerable is greater than the danger of merely a small diversionary raid which could be eliminated by a few men. I do not believe that Canada is going to be a main theatre of war in the foreseeable future, nor do I believe that the greatest effort to prevent a third world war can be made here in Canada. It will be necessary, as has been announced by the government, to fight Canada's battles and protect Canada's homes as far away from Canadian homes as it is practical to do so.
The crucial theatre of war today is western Europe. If we adopt this idea of building up large reserve forces by compulsory enlistment I think we shall have to divert some of the equipment which the minister announced only a few days ago was being sent, an announcement which was applauded by hon. members on all sides of the house. That equipment is being sent to help our comrades in arms of other groups in the United Nations to defend their homes and our homes. I do not believe it would be in the best interests of the United Nations or in the best interests of Canada to divert equipment at this stage from European nations in order to use it for reserve forces here in Canada.
For the reasons I have given I cannot support the subamendment as moved last night.


Mr. Irvin Studer (Maple Creek):: Mr. Speaker, this is my first opportunity this session to address you as Mr. Speaker. I appreciate that privilege because today we are living in a world in which democratic boundaries are becoming narrower and narrower as time goes on. I deeply appreciate the permission that has been granted us to express our opinions in this house. I hope it is taken for granted by the mover (Mr. McMillan) and the seconder (Mr. Breton) of the address that we also extend our congratulations to them. We also congratulate those who have been elevated and accepted recently in the higher sphere of government in this House of Commons.
The Address-Mr. Studer
To those who mourn at this time, especially those from our province, we should like to extend our sympathies and consolation and the hope that they will find consolation in loving memories and the kind solicitude of their many friends. I have just had the privilege of listening to what I consider one of the best patriotic speeches we have heard in this House of Commons during this session. We appreciate that, as does everyone in the Dominion of Canada at the present moment.
Last year hon. members were kind enough to listen to a discussion by me of my constituency of Maple Creek. I should like to extend that a little this year. I have the largest settled constituency in the Dominion of Canada which also has the record of being the driest constituency in the country. The problems that we face are chronic. I would like to say a few words in connection with conditions there.
We have the largest number of polling places, 272, of any rural constituency in the Dominion of Canada. As I say, our conditions are critical because of a lack of moisture and therefore it must be taken for granted that my constituency is not too prosperous. But with the assistance of the government and the policies that have been brought about from time to time we are making progress in Maple Creek. However, the purchasing lower of the people remains at a low ebb Decause where there is no production, there is no value. Yet the cost of production must be met.
We hear references to the cost of living among the labouring and other classes, but the condition there is static. There is no comparison between that situation and the situation faced by farmers in areas such as mine who are receiving no compensation for their year's work and yet they must contend with overhead in connection with the operation of their farms. One can imagine what the situation is like when it is continued over a period of years. These people must get along on crop failure payments which were set in 1939. We hope to rectify that situation. We would like the government to give consideration to the situation that actually exists in that part of the country and when we take care of difficulties which arise in other areas we should bring these people along until such time as we can carry our fair share of the burdens of the economy of this country, which we hope will be soon.
We heard of the tragedies that occurred at Cabano, Rimouski and in the Red river valley. Those were terrible tragedies, but there is no tragedy that compares with that faced by a farmer who farms for thirty
3B0

The Address-Mr. Studer years and then has nothing to show for his labours. We should continue with all haste to rehabilitate these people and make it possible for them to take their places in life along with the rest of us. The first essential in rehabilitation is take out of production lands that are of no value and return them to their native grass. It is the responsibility of the province to declare lands to be submarginal. I call upon the province of Saskatchewan, which to my knowledge has not all through the years declared one single acre in that entire area to be submarginal, to determine what lands shall be considered submarginal so that we can proceed with the necessary rehabilitation.
I told the house last year that we had in Maple Creek some of the best things in the whole Dominion of Canada. This year I am glad to be able to say to the house that we have some of the best things in the whole world. This past fall, despite severe drought, grasshoppers, dust and many of the other things that we must face in that part of the country, R. P. Robbins, a farmer in my constituency, won the world wheat championship. That is a particularly high honour to win considering the conditions under which the wheat was grown. It is an honour which was particularly due to that individual. He is one of those real men who come from the mother country of England. He came to this country about thirty years ago possessed of that bulldog tenacity that people from Great Britain seem to have. He held on in spite of the greatest difficulties. In that area there were seven consecutive crop failures in the last ten years and yet he produced world championship wheat. I think that is a record in itself for an individual to keep trying that long on 160 acres of land, which is equivalent to about 10 acres in this part of the country. He has been trying to make a living and make a contribution to the dominion in which he lives so that as a result of his work and his labours those who follow after him will benefit as a result of his having been there. Having lived under such conditions with just the bare necessities of life, trying to carve out a home, having worked for many years, he does not receive sufficient from the world's championship wheat prize to make it even worth while to ship the prize wheat to Chicago. There is no concerted effort in the Dominion of Canada to recognize that the world's wheat championship is of any value to the economy of Canada, and I think it is.
We have the record in Canada of growing the world's best wheat, and whenever the championship goes out of the dominion I think a part of the record goes with it. In

spite of that, only incidental recognition has been given to any of these men. I call upon the people who are interested in the money that has accrued to the economy of Canada from the production of wheat to take into consideration that perhaps something should be done, if not for him-and I hope it will be -for all others who will follow, in order to provide an incentive so that the quality of our wheat may be improved, or at least maintained, and thus assist the general economy of the country. Therefore I ask the farm organizations, the grain handling concerns, the wheat pools, the provincial governments and the Dominion of Canada to give consideration to establishing a prize of $5,000 that any man in Canada can win. It would not be even the tiniest speck in the economy of our country compared with the value of winning the championship.
Something should be done to recognize the value of wheat to this country. These men do not only win championships. They spend their lives in trying to produce better wheat. Therefore I think the least the Dominion of Canada can do is to recognize the fact that some people are working in its interests, silently and alone, and are producing results although subject to the greatest possible discouragement. I want to place before the house the record of the people of the constituency of Maple Creek to indicate what they have been trying to do. I want to place before the people of Canada the results of the efforts that have been made there.
I think there has been some discussion in the house, so far as wheat is concerned, with respect to the four-year British wheat agreement. We have heard the matter raised and discussed from day to day. I believe the impression that has been left in the House of Commons and throughout the dominion is that about the year 1946 a contract was signed between the government of Canada and the people of Canada. I believe that is the impression throughout the country at the present time, but the fact is that a contract was signed beween the government of Great Britain and the wheat growers of western Canada represented by the government of Canada. Under the contract Great Britain agreed to pay a certain price for Canadian wheat over a period of years. At the end of that term of years, if the price that had been paid was not approximately equal to the world price during the same period, under the contract the British government would give consideration to what is termed the "have regard to" clause, and would make up the difference between the price it had paid and the world price.

That was not an agreement between the people of Canada generally and the wheat growers of Canada in particular. It was an agreement between Great Britain and the wheat growers of this country. I believe more emphasis should be placed on the honouring of a contract between two countries. If there is any honour left between nations-* and we see too much of dishonour among nations of the world-I think the contract should be fulfilled by the peopl who signed it. If members of the House of Commons were in agreement with the British wheat contract, then every agreeing member of the House of Commons signed. Therefore I think they should not try to compel the people of Canada as a whole to pay the additional sum required under the wheat agreement. I think it is their duty to endeavour to obtain payment from the place where primarily it was supposed to have been paid. If that is the situation I think we should do something about it.
Some people estimate that the loss has been 50 cents a bushel, but I have not heard one member say what the world price of class II wheat would have been if the 600 million bushels of grain sold under the British contract had been placed on the open market, and we had had the same experience with the open market that western Canada has had in the past. I venture to say that the world price of class II wheat would not have been such as to involve the loss to western Canada mentioned by some hon. members.
What would the price have been? If we go back to former years before there was a wheat board or a wheat pool, we will have an indication of what the situation was so far as the open market was concerned, as pointed out yesterday by the hon. member for Moose Mountain (Mr. Smith). I maintain that our system of marketing wheat under control, under the wheat pool, is the only system that is satisfactory to the farmers because it means orderly marketing, and that is what the farmers want. They want orderly marketing so that millions of bushels of wheat will not be dumped on the market in the fall, depress the price, and after it has disappeared have the price go up the following spring.
That was the argument of the farmers of western Canada against the open market system which allowed only those with sufficient money to speculate on the open market to make money that should have accrued to the farmers of western Canada. To those who would be the saviours of the western Canadian farmer, and also to those who are supporting the view that the government should pay, let me ask why the western 80709-24
The Address-Mr. Studer farmers should have to help to pay the additional sum under the British wheat contract. If that is not the situation, let the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher) get up and explain it. During the last session he said that the farmers of Saskatchewan were paying more income taxes than farmers of any other province. If this payment must come out of the people of Canada through the government will it not have to come out of income taxes? Where else can it come from? If Saskatchewan farmers are paying the highest income taxes why penalize them to make this payment?
Surely the hon. member for Melfort (Mr. Wright) would not want to do that. On another occasion he argued against the 20-cent interim payment on wheat by the government. He said that the government should not have done it because the farmers had to pay interest on it, and the farmers should not have been compelled to pay interest. Now he is demanding that the farmers pay most of the additional amount being asked for from the people of Canada through the dominion government. If these hon. members-especially the socialists-want to be the saviours of the farmers, if they want to be of service to the people of Canada, they should hie themselves over to Great Britain and talk to their socialist friends who now control the government of that country. They should tell their socialist friends that Canada signed a contract that they agreed to in the House of Commons. They should ask them what they are going to do about meeting the obligation they are in honour bound to meet. If they do not pay it then I would say that there i9 a conspiracy between the socialists of Canada and the socialists of Great Britain to refrain from paying the farmers of western Canada what is their just due until after the provincial election in Saskatchewan. I would tell them to go over there and closet themselves with their socialist friends and convince them that there should be some honour-well, there is honour even among the people who are not so good. I do not like to use the word. I would ask them to do that. If they cannot get over there any other way, I suggest that the province of Saskatchewan will pay their passage because the province would be bound to win. There would be that much additional money in Saskatchewan, and we need a lot of money in Saskatchewan because the taxes are going up. Anything we can get from any other source will be mighty handy within the next five years if we are still there.
Along with that, I would suggest that the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) go along because, although he might not wish to be included in the company of socialists


Mr. Ross (Souris):: Hear, hear.
362	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Studer


Irvin William Studer: -nevertheless he has been stowing away in the same boat. He has been riding with them. If they will not accept his company, then I would suggest he go to the grain exchange. They might contribute towards his passage over there.


James Arthur Ross: He is not very acceptable there either.


Irvin William Studer: He could have a heart to
heart talk with the leader of the opposition in Britain, and tell him about the situation in Canada. He could tell him, "Perhaps you had better take some action." The margin is rather close over in Britain as between the two. I believe we would get some results if we had good men such as the socialists from Saskatchewan serving in this House of Commons, and the member for Souris, over there talking to the leader of the opposition. Any spare time the member for Souris had he could spend at the corn exchange in London.
There has been a lot of talk about buying British products. We in western Canada will buy British products if those people will honour some of the contracts that the two countries have previously signed. What is the opinion of the western farmer concerning these contracts, if he is called upon to partially pay for them? Is he to accept something from a country that does not honour its contracts? I would not worry too much about the dumping duties that seem to have been worrying the member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher). I would worry about these contracts being fulfilled. I am sure that, when they are, much of the difficulty between the two countries will be removed. I want them to bring back twenty-five cents a bushel when they return from Britain, and nothing less, because nothing less is going to satisfy the people of Saskatchewan.
I intended to refer for a moment, Mr. Speaker, to the socialist subamendment that was made at the beginning of the session. However, that is out of the picture now, except for one thing. Although the socialists here were not too proud of it, and did not call for a recorded vote, there was a recorded vote in Saskatchewan on that subamendment. If the socialist members in this house are ashamed of it, there are some gentlemen out in Saskatchewan who are not ashamed of it. They are holding up the semblance of this subamendment as a bait, you might call it, and are prepared to run an election campaign on Korean policy. What in hell has the Korean policy to do with Saskatchewan? That is what I should like to know. You will pardon the word, Mr. Speaker, but I have 

heard it often in church so I thought it was all right to use it here. What the socialists here are not so proud of, their brothers in Saskatchewan seem to be proud of, because in the debate on the speech from the throne the premier of that province told the people of Saskatchewan he would hold an election campaign on this Korean issue. We find a Goliath, a Colossus, from the province of Saskatchewan, who is emulating Samson by going out and slaying the Philistines, not the Philistines in Saskatchewan but 500,000 Liberals, with the jawbone of an ass. I am telling the world that the United Nations have missed a sure bet when they missed the brains that are just wasting away out in our province of Saskatchewan, because when the premier was in this House of Commons he had the solution for everything. He has the solution for everything in that province of Saskatchewan which everyone is leaving. Now, he is going to settle all the difficulties of the whole wide world.
I do not offer any apologies, Mr. Speaker, for talking about the province of Saskatchewan, because two-thirds of the time spent in the provincial legislature in Saskatchewan is spent in discussing federal matters. I believe that the socialists should practise what they preach. They come to this house and talk about price controls, the high cost of living, but they hold the solution to the problem in their own hands out in the province of Saskatchewan. Instead of coming down here and telling this government what to do, they should go back to the province of Saskatchewan and tell the government out there what to do about it. They have thirteen crown corporations that have a lot to do with the cost of living in the province of Saskatchewan. I would tell them to eliminate the box factory which they own, and make lumber. They are always mentioning the lack of houses. Why do they not get busy and make lumber at the box factory, and then they could build houses?
The Saskatchewan government also owns a brick factory. Bricks enter into house building; why do they not make more bricks and utilize them for building purposes instead of utilizing them for brickbats to throw at people? The provincial government has a leather factory. The co-operative horse factory is right next door, so they can get supplies of leather. There is plenty of leather there. There is no need for the children in Saskatchewan to go barefoot because the government cannot obtain enough leather. They also have a wool factory. I do not know whether it is operating, but if it belonged to

a Liberal government and was not operating we would hear plenty about it. There is plenty of wool in the constituency of Maple Creek. They would not need to be talking about the poor neglected children who are walking around without proper clothing if they produced enough wool. There is a co-operative flour mill in Saskatchewan. Why do they not provide a subsidy to make bread for the hungry people of Saskatchewan? We want the price reduced on all of those things. Get the price down to the ordinary level they are talking about in this house. The government owns the telephone system. Why not also reduce the rates for that service?- because it enters into the cost of living. The government owns buses. Why do they not give us two tickets for a nickel, so that the ordinary person could ride on the buses?
I believe the government of the province has some control over liquor-at least, I have heard about it. I have not heard anything about reducing the price, but I have heard a lot about increasing the water. Why does the government not increase the mothers' allowances? That would increase the purchasing power of the poor people. These poor mothers have nothing else to depend upon except what a beneficent government might allow them. They have the lowest mothers' allowance in the Dominion of Canada. They might increase the old age pensions, about which they are always talking. This pension could be increased until it at least equalled that of the neighbouring province of Alberta. It is said that in Saskatchewan some assistance is given by way of health service. The same thing is done in Alberta and British Columbia where the pensions are $50 per month, while in Saskatchewan it is $42.50, of which $2.50 is subject to the means test.
In Saskatchewan, the premier stated in the debate on the address that crown corporations made $11 million. Where is that $11 million? There is no record of it. It was supposed to be used to reduce the cost of social services. No one can find any record of it. In any event, that $11 million should not be there because these crown companies are supposed to provide a service and not operate for profit. They must have taken the $11 million away from someone. I believe the government could go into the manufacture of liquor, because that is where the real money is. Between 1945 and 1949, $4,675 million was spent on tobacco and liquor in Canada. If a portion of that money were placed in the economy of the poor people, in order for them to buy the necessities of life instead of the extravagances of life, what results would that not have in
The Address-Mr. Studer regard to the cost of living in this country of ours? I do not think any country is proud of that figure. The only people who can reduce it are the people of Canada themselves. They cannot reduce it through laws. So when we talk about armaments and billions of dollars, that is the disarmament figure for the Dominion of Canada; because that amount of money is not uplifting the spirit or the morale of the people of Canada. It is disarming them. If the Russian people can increase that disarmament, through the poverty, illness and unhappiness that enter into that figure of over $4J billion, to the extent that the people are completely demoralized, it would be walking right into the Russian trap.
I am not saying that the government of Saskatchewan should manufacture liquor. I am not saying that no one should drink liquor. But I think it should be done moderately. Liquor is one of the things that are put on earth, the same as all other good things, in order that it may be utilized moderately. But if the Saskatchewan government still wants to make some money, they might keep their eye on that possibility. If they do not like that, they can perhaps begin to make some machinery. They invested many millions of dollars in these crown corporations and their speakers go up and down, the province talking about the high cost of machinery. There is out there Canadian Co-operative Implements. Stick a few million dollars into that in order to provide some additional machinery for the people of Saskatchewan which they can afford to pay for.
So whither are we going? Why do we not practise what we preach? I do not think they are socialists at all, as far as Saskatchewan affairs are concerned, from what we have heard and the different issues that they place before the people, like the Korean affair and the Saskatchewan premier talking and saying in the debate on the speech from the throne that there was a prominent Liberal in Ottawa who went to New York and told the oil men in New York not to invest in Saskatchewan because if they did the C.C.F. would be elected again. Mr. Speaker, I think politics are getting to a fairly low level. No one needs to go to New York in order to discourage anyone from investing in Saskatchewan. The Regina manifesto that went through in the year 1935 stated that socialism will not rest content until capitalism is eradicated from the face of the earth. No one needs to go to New York or anywhere else, because their words have preceded them. The premier himself was in New York not so long ago and he
80709-24 i

The Address-Mr. Studer must have confirmed them in their belief that there was a mighty slim possibility of getting any of their money back if they put it into Saskatchewan, until there is a different government there. So I would say they are not socialists at all; they are just political auctioneers. They just auction off their ideas, their votes, even their very souls, to the highest bidder. That is the philosophy that I find when the socialists are out on the hustings in Saskatchewan and I think the whole world should know about it.
They say that communism breeds on malnutrition, or that communism is a disease. What causes socialism? It must be a deficiency in the diet. That cause has an extremely depressing effect. They certainly are depressing. No matter how high is our standard of living, no matter how great is our prosperity, you will never see a socialist enjoying it. He will suffer the highest form of prosperity in the world. So I would say that we should know the men that are in this country, and that they should stand up and be counted, because we are living in serious days. I believe that the socialists are following the same tortuous road they followed prior to 1939, working in the hope that the people would side in with them in what they thought was the cause of the former war. I am telling you what I know when I say that those socialists were hand in glove with the ideas and the philosophy of Hitler up until 1942 when Russia was attacked. Then you saw the slickest political phenomenon on the North American continent in the about-face they made at that time. That was the situation out there in Saskatchewan, and more people should know about it. I am prepared to tell them about it when the time comes.
Socialism does not mean distribution; it means confiscation, everywhere in the world. There is no distribution under socialism because socialism has never been able to produce that which is required, let alone have anything to distribute. That is the situation with regard to socialism. I therefore say: Know the men in this country so that we can tell what they stand for; and I would say to them that the time has come right now to vote, not for a third force in the world because there is no such thing as a third force. There is no room for a third force. There are only the forces of evil and the forces of good. Let them align themselves with the forces that they think they should support here in the House of Commons, out in Saskatchewan and all over the world.
Having spoken about knowing your men, Mr. Speaker, I should now like to present to you some views in just a slightly different

vein. Speaking about men and descriptions of them, figuratively, typically and all the rest of it, may I say that we acquire names for ourselves in spite of ourselves. To give you an illustration of the typicalness of a name, may I refer you to Senator Taft in the United States. He is referred to all over the country as Mr. Republican. The reason he is referred to as Mr. Republican is that he typifies what is basically inherent in the Republican party. There are people of that kind. You and I acquire names descriptive of us. You will also find in the United States that Mr. James Farley is described as Mr. Democrat. Some years ago he wrote a book called "Behind the Ballots". I read that book, and after I read it I decided to go into politics. Now I think I am on my way out. However, I read the book and that was the result. Then we come to Britain and who could be more typical of Britain than Mr. Churchill. He would go by the name of Mr. Britain. Then when we come to Canada, who could be more descriptive of the Canadian people from one end of the country to the other than our beloved Prime Minister of Canada (Mr. St. Laurent), Mr. Canadian. Then we have another individual who is typical of the Liberal party, who year in and year out, in bad times and in good times, has preached the spirit of Liberalism. I refer to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), Mr. Liberal. Then I would refer to another gentleman; and wherever his name would be mentioned anywhere in the world he would be referred to as Mr. Statesman. I have reference to the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson). Then we have a member who celebrated his birthday today and who has endeared himself to the heart of everyone; regardless of whether we wanted it to happen or not, he has endeared himself to us all. I refer to the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor). He would be Mr. Minister.
Then we could perhaps come over to this side of the house and describe someone who would be typical of the Conservative party. 1 would select the hon. member for Queens (Mr. McLure) for that honour, Mr. Conservative. Someone else who would: be typical of the Progressive Conservative party would be the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefembaker), Mr. Progressive. One individual that I think should also have the honour of being mentioned is the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross). I think one could describe him as Mr. Grain Exchange.


James Arthur Ross: I was not going to make a speech, but now I will.


Irvin William Studer: Then there is the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell). Everyone takes it for granted that he is Mr. Socialist. Then there is the hon, member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher); and there is no argument about it, he is Mr. Capitalist. The hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) will of course be known as Mr. Professor. There is no denying that. The hon, member for Beauce (Mr. Poulin) is without doubt Mr. Independent. There is one other gentleman that I dare not leave out. He was a former member of this house. I refer to the present premier of Saskatchewan. His name will surely go down in history as Mr. Politician. He is the biggest politician on the North American continent, bar none. Here is the description of these various gentlemen that I give. I offer the descriptions with no malice whatsoever, Mr. Speaker. No doubt as time goes on I shall get a proper description of myself.
I should be getting pretty close to the end of what I did not have to say. I wish to make one or two more remarks and then I shall be thankful for your consideration. The newspapers are playing a great part in the history of this country. So far as the opposition members are concerned, seldom do they speak without holding up a clipping from some newspaper in Canada, describing what in the editor's opinion should be done. If the newspapers of this country are running the country-and they are because sooner or later we are going to do what they say-if that is so, then I suggest that they should be represented in this House of Commons. I think they would be able to give great service to the people of this country and to the House of Commons if they displaced some of the members of the opposition, because they have been awfully weak in their arguments, and I am sure that some of the editors would be much more helpful than what we hear in this house day after day.
Some of these newspapers might be able to give assistance to the government side of the house, because it would eliminate a lot of this misquoting and a lot of the instructions to newspaper reporters. This is the instruction that is given to them: "We are not so much interested in what he says; go out and get a story". If we had a much more extensive representation in the House of Commons some of that would be eliminated.
Then, if we had representation from newspapers on the government side of the house there would be the necessity of having parliamentary assistants and we are surrounded with likely candidates over here. The hon. member for Northumberland, N.B. (Mr. McWilliam), the editor of the North Shore
The Address-Mr. Studer Leader, the hon. member for Durham (Mr. James), the editor of the Bowmanville Statesman, the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Murray), the editor of the Alaska Highway, and the hon. member for Huron-Perth (Mr. McLean), the editor of the Huron Expositor, would all fit the bill. We would have lots of assistance in the House of Commons in regard to keeping the record straight.
If they are to displace anyone in opposition I would suggest that they be displaced by the editor of the Montreal Gazette, the editor of the Ottawa Journal, the editor of the Globe and Mail, the editor of the Vancouver Province, the editor of the Winnipeg Tribune and the editor of the Halifax Herald. If our socialist friends over there need some assistance I would nominate the editor of the Saskatchewan Commonwealth. He has the keenest one-track mind in Canada.
Since we are living in a troubled world perhaps we should not be prone to levity. We are living in a world where, as everyone knows, it is considered that might is right. In Canada we have adopted the philosophy that only right makes might. Therefore we are living in a world in which there are these two philosophies of life. As the hon. member for Vegreville (Mr. Decore) and the hon. member for Edmonton East (Mr. Macdonald) said yesterday in their well delivered speeches, the real danger that confronts us is an enemy who is ruthless and who will stop at nothing to achieve his purposes.
In closing I should like to say that in my opinion the system that the enemy is using at the present time to undermine the nations of the world is both physical and psychological. That is, he appeals to the hunger that is in people. He appeals to their suffering and then to their spirit. There has been a concerted effort during a great number of years by these people who control the Kremlin, and hope to control the world, to destroy people's minds. As I said, their appeal is both physical and psychological. That is true especially in regard to the different races of the world.
As we know it today, the white race is outnumbered seven to one. That is, there are seven coloured people to every white person in the world today. I believe the Kremlin is making an appeal to these coloured people all over the world. They are filling them with the doctrine that the white people have dominated them and exploited them throughout the centuries. They tell them that their enemies are the white people of the world. In rebuttal I would say that the white people are the only people that are the hope of the world, because they are the only people who

The Address-Mr. Thomas have solved the difficult problem of production and the method of distributing the surplus of their production to other people of the world. How are people to be fed unless some civilization solves the production problem? I would say that the coloured people can look to the white people for their idealism and to safeguard them and lead them to a better life rather than look to those nations that would destroy not only them but us.
The science of destruction has advanced rapidly throughout all the world. It is the prayer of all good men that this same science, energy, striving for peace, brains and money could be utilized to eliminate poverty and disease in the world, and that we endeavour to offer to all the people of the world, whatever their colour may be, our assistance in regard to their needs, physically, mentally and psychologically.
I am sure that Canadians will accept their responsibility along with the other twelve nations of the United Nations Organization, first to maintain peace, second, to guarantee that peace in the present-day world by being strong, and third, to recognize with all of the people on earth their right, along with ours, to health, wealth and happiness.


Mr. Ray Thomas (Weiaskiwin):: Mr. Speaker, we have heard a great deal during the course of this debate about whether or not war with the Soviet union is inevitable. We certainly hope that it is not. But war will be inevitable if we fail to make our forces strong enough to defeat the forces of communism.
There is no way on this earth that we can talk to them, get together with them and form any compromise. Stalin has made it clear on many occasions that they are out to rule the world, and nothing short of that will be satisfactory. That end has been advocated all the way down from the time of Marx, and it will never change. The Russian minister of education as quoted in the September issue of Outlook said-I will not attempt to give the exact words, but the effect of his statement was this: "We must hate Christians. Even the best Christian is our worst enemy. They preach the doctrine, love thy neighbour. We say, hate thy neighbour; for without hate we cannot conquer the world". These are the men, Mr. Speaker, that we are trying to talk to and attempting to pacify. It simply cannot be done, and the only possible way that we can stop this Russian aggression is by seeing that we are willing not only to match their strength but to go beyond it. We must remember also that now we have not only Russia to deal with,


but practically all of the Orient. We can blame ourselves for the fact that the Chinese people's government has lined itself alongside Russia.
I am mighty glad to see the Colombo plan going ahead. It will be a good thing, but it should have been done fifteen or twenty years ago. Those people were starving; they have been starving for years while we in the so-called western democratic countries have been crying because we had surpluses and no markets in which to place them. We made it evident to them that the only interest we had in their affairs was that of exploitation. Now, twenty years too late, we are trying to give some aid to those undeveloped countries. Years ago we should have shown that we have some sense of responsibility and some thought in line with that, spirit of Christian charity about which we boast so often. Now, after all these years, when it is too late, we offer them assistance-not through the goodness of our hearts but through the fear of communism.
According to the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) the defence of Canada is to be the first consideration. I agree wholeheartedly; but for goodness' sake let us go ahead and do something. Reports indicate that voluntary enlistments in the armed forces are not sufficient, that the permanent army is about seven thousand below required strength and that the reserves are greatly undermanned. Surely, if the minister says that the defence of Canada is our first consideration, we should do something about the deficiencies in our reserve army at least.
Many people say that compulsory service in the reserve force would withdraw men from the active army to serve in the capacity of instructors. That is not so. There are any number of good officers, retired and medically unfit for active service who, if asked, would be only too willing to give their service for the training of these men.
As a matter of fact during the last war the thirty-day training schools were staffed almost one hundred per cent by men medically unfit for the active armies. I would be the first to admit that most communities have inadequate facilities and equipment to go into a large scale training plan at the present time. But, after all, whose responsibility is that? Why do they not have the equipment and facilities they need? While much of it may be out of date, we have now enough equipment at least to make a beginning.
Speaking the other day the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) said that

at present in the reserve forces we find parades called with only about six officers and four men showing up. That is in itself sufficient reason to see that these reserve training units should be brought up to capacity. Quite apart from war, this military training would not do anyone any harm, especially the youngsters. It gives an opportunity for first-class physical training for those who need it. As the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Shaw) pointed out last night, at least it teaches those who attend which end of the gun to hold to their shoulder before pulling the trigger.
There is no doubt that in the present situation compulsory training is essential. Let us have cadet training in the schools and colleges. Let the young men have their training, and then permit them to go into industry, with the understanding that they may come back one or two evenings each week to gain at least some knowledge of any technological advances there may have been.
With respect to registration: if war were to come to Canada we would find registration absolutely essential. The present outlook indicates that such a thing might happen in a very short time. The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance, speaking the other day, threw a challenge across the floor of the house in which he asked the opposition how to save money. If the government wants to save money, then let it have the registration made at the same time the census is taken next summer. By doing that they would see how many millions in expenses they could save.
National registration would give the government an idea as to the possibilities of each and every person in the country, and also a very clear indication of any subversive elements we may have-and believe me we have some. That, too, is our own fault. We have those subversive elements here today because the government has refused time and again to put forth some sort of concrete financial policy which would offer the people of Canada some degree of security.
We won the last war, but not necessarily because the men and machines we had were better than those possessed by the Germans. I would be the first to say that the Canadian armed forces were the best to be found anywhere in the world. But we won that war simply because we had more men and equipment than did our enemy. Then, let us get ahead, and see that we have more equipment this time-because if war comes we are going to need it, and need it badly.
The Address-Mr. Thomas Speaking the other day, the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Pearkes) said that American forces were going into Korea after eighteen-day refresher courses. We do not want to see that happen here. My mind goes back to the early days of the last war, when men had to be sent across with no knowledge at all of military affairs. This time we may not have a buffer state to protect us until our men are ready. Not only that, we have no reason to believe that we might not be attacked right here on our own soil. It was reported in the press not long ago that one of the United States pilots in Korea had stated that if the United States had had the MIG-15 jet plane and if the communists in Korea had been equipped with the United States jet planes they would have been slaughtered, they would have wiped the skies with the North Korean communists. That bodes ill when you consider that for the most part the Chinese communist pilots are poorly trained. What would happen if we were to run into superior numbers of well-trained Russian pilots in their apparently superior MIG-15 fighter planes? While I am speaking about jet planes and pilots I should like to refer to an article which appeared in the Ottawa Citizen of February 8 which reads:
400 jets a month said Russian aim
Russia is expanding production of her MIG-15 jet fighter planes and, say Swedish sources, expects to be producing 400 a month in the next few months, the magazine Aviation Age said yesterday. It said American production of planes of all types does not exceed 250 a month.
That means that our whole defence program is entirely inadequate, not only in connection with the training of men for the reserve and active forces but in connection with our industries. There is already a shortage of manpower, and training in the reserve forces is the only way this country can have its men trained without disrupting industry. If the government want to get manpower all .they need to do is to remove the means test from the veterans allowances and the old age pensions. They will find that these older people can do a good job. They may not be able to do the hard work that younger men can do but there are many jobs in industry they can handle quite well.
Let us call upon the women of this country. They will go into industry if required. Let us encourage the married women to go to work by allowing them to earn up to the income tax exemption of a single person without any penalty being imposed upon the husband. There is really no shortage of manpower in Canada. We have lots of it if the government will go ahead and utilize what is available. These things will create

The Address-Mr. Thomas small inconveniences, and I think that is admitted by all. But will anyone in this house say that a few inconveniences are not better than slavery under the heel of Moscow?
Accusations have been flying around the house ever since this debate started about skating around this and skating around that. The official opposition has accused the government of skating around the international situation and not giving the people a true picture. The government has accused the official opposition of skating around by not making any concrete proposals. The C.C.F. has accused the government of skating around something else. Incidentally the best job of skating around I have seen was the speech this afternoon of the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Pearkes). He made the best Liberal speech
I have ever heard in this house. If skating is a good description to use, I think the floor of this House of Commons during this debate would remind me of a community skating rink on a Sunday afternoon when the subject of manpower is mentioned.
To carry on just a bit further with this skating, this amendment has the effect of giving members of this house and those who are doing so much skating, the rules of the game and a hockey stick. Let us get on with the game.
On motion of Mr. Gillis the debate was adjourned.
On motion of Mr. Fournier (Hull) the house adjourned at 5.50 p.m.

Thursday, February 15, 1951